§Why CasetextPricing

SALAS v. SIERRA CHEMICAL

Appellant’s Petition for Review

68 Cited authorities

  1. Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co.

    25 Cal.4th 826 (Cal. 2001)   Cited 4,840 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Concluding that the gathering and dissemination of pricing information by the petroleum companies through an independent industry service did not imply collusive action where there was no evidence the information was misused as a basis for an unlawful conspiracy; rather, evidence suggested that individual companies used all available resources “to determine capacity, supply, and pricing decisions which would maximize their own individual profits”

  2. McKennon v. Nashville Banner Publ'g Co.

    513 U.S. 352 (1995)   Cited 1,179 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, under the ADEA, neither reinstatement nor front pay is appropriate when, subsequent to the statutory violation, the plaintiff's employment has been terminated for legitimate reasons

  3. Hoffman Plastic Compounds v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    535 U.S. 137 (2002)   Cited 317 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Holding that backpay awards to undocumented workers terminated in violation of the National Labor Relations Act ran counter to federal immigration law

  4. Fladeboe v. America Isuzu Motors Inc.

    150 Cal.App.4th 42 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007)   Cited 671 times
    Holding party lacks standing to seek declaratory relief under a contract to which plaintiff is not a party or third party beneficiary

  5. Sutton v. Providence St. Joseph Medical Center

    192 F.3d 826 (9th Cir. 1999)   Cited 665 times
    Holding that the “ultimate issue” in deciding whether a private defendant can be sued under RFRA is whether “the alleged infringement of federal rights” is “fairly attributable to the government”

  6. Murphy v. Kenneth Cole Productions Inc.

    40 Cal.4th 1094 (Cal. 2007)   Cited 513 times   19 Legal Analyses
    Holding that California Labor Code claims have a three-year statute of limitations

  7. Perma Mufflers v. Int'l Parts Corp.

    392 U.S. 134 (1968)   Cited 512 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that doctrine of in pari delicto is not a defense to an antitrust suit

  8. Lyle v. Warner Brothers Television Productions

    38 Cal.4th 264 (Cal. 2006)   Cited 459 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "California courts have adopted the same standard as [Title VII] for hostile work environment sexual harassment claims."

  9. Kahn v. East Side Union High School Dist.

    31 Cal.4th 990 (Cal. 2003)   Cited 455 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that for an intervening act properly to be considered a superseding cause, "the act must have produced harm of a kind and degree far beyond the risk that the original tortfeasor should have foreseen"

  10. Laabs v. City of Victorville

    163 Cal.App.4th 1242 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008)   Cited 370 times
    Finding no abuse of discretion where the trial court "could have easily concluded that at the time plaintiff refused to admit such matters she reasonably held a good faith belief that she would prevail at trial on these issues"

  11. Section 437c - Motion for summary judgment

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 437c   Cited 8,235 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Ruling on summary judgment motion must be based on "papers submitted" with the motion

  12. Section 12900 - Short title

    Cal. Gov. Code § 12900   Cited 2,240 times   9 Legal Analyses

    This part may be known and referred to as the "California Fair Employment and Housing Act." Ca. Gov. Code § 12900 Amended by Stats 2022 ch 48 (SB 189),s 29, eff. 6/30/2022(amended Part heading). Added by Stats. 1980, Ch. 992.

  13. Section 1324a - Unlawful employment of aliens

    8 U.S.C. § 1324a   Cited 580 times   44 Legal Analyses
    Authorizing the Attorney General to pursue injunctive relief and criminal sanctions in federal district court

  14. Section 437 - Grounds for motion to appear on face of challenged pleading; motion based on matter subject to judicial notice

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 437   Cited 288 times   2 Legal Analyses

    (a) The grounds for a motion to strike shall appear on the face of the challenged pleading or from any matter of which the court is required to take judicial notice. (b) Where the motion to strike is based on matter of which the court may take judicial notice pursuant to Section 452 or 453 of the Evidence Code, such matter shall be specified in the notice of motion, or in the supporting points and authorities, except as the court may otherwise permit. Ca. Civ. Proc. Code § 437 Added by Stats. 1982

  15. Section 1324c - Penalties for document fraud

    8 U.S.C. § 1324c   Cited 130 times
    Criminalizing the failure to disclose that a person received a "fee or other remuneration" for assisting with false applications for immigration benefits

  16. Section 6721 - Failure to file correct information returns

    26 U.S.C. § 6721   Cited 119 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Imposing penalty for failure to file “information return”

  17. Section 6109 - Identifying numbers

    26 U.S.C. § 6109   Cited 77 times
    Providing that SSN is principal identifier for tax purposes

  18. Section 1171.5 - Legislative findings

    Cal. Lab. Code § 1171.5   Cited 33 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Extending all protections under state law to those who have “been employed” in this state, which includes “all individuals regardless of immigration status”

  19. Section 7285 - Immigration status irrelevant

    Cal. Gov. Code § 7285   Cited 19 times   2 Legal Analyses

    The Legislature finds and declares the following: (a) All protections, rights, and remedies available under state law, except any reinstatement remedy prohibited by federal law, are available to all individuals regardless of immigration status who have applied for employment, or who are or who have been employed, in this state. (b) For purposes of enforcing state labor, employment, civil rights, consumer protection, and housing laws, a person's immigration status is irrelevant to the issue of liability

  20. Section 3339 - Protections, rights and remedies available regardless of immigration status

    Cal. Civ. Code § 3339   Cited 17 times

    The Legislature finds and declares the following: (a) All protections, rights, and remedies available under state law, except any reinstatement remedy prohibited by federal law, are available to all individuals regardless of immigration status who have applied for employment, or who are or who have been employed, in this state. (b) For purposes of enforcing state labor, employment, civil rights, consumer protection, and housing laws, a person's immigration status is irrelevant to the issue of liability

  21. Section 274a.2 - Verification of identity and employment authorization

    8 C.F.R. § 274a.2   Cited 85 times   31 Legal Analyses
    Establishing Form I–9

  22. Section 301.6724-1 - Reasonable cause

    26 C.F.R. § 301.6724-1   Cited 13 times

    (a)Waiver of the penalty - (1)General rule. The penalty for a failure relating to an information reporting requirement as defined in paragraph (j) of this section is waived if the failure is due to reasonable cause and is not due to willful neglect. (2)Reasonable cause defined. The penalty is waived for reasonable cause only if the filer establishes that either- (i) There are significant mitigating factors with respect to the failure, as described in paragraph (b) of this section; or (ii) The failure

  23. Section 274a.4 - Good faith defense

    8 C.F.R. § 274a.4

    An employer or a recruiter or referrer for a fee for employment who shows good faith compliance with the employment verification requirements of § 274a.2(b) of this part shall have established a rebuttable affirmative defense that the person or entity has not violated section 274A(a)(1)(A) of the Act with respect to such hiring, recruiting, or referral. 8 C.F.R. §274a.4

  24. Rule 8.278 - Costs on appeal

    Cal. R. 8.278   Cited 4,783 times

    (a)Award of costs (1) Except as provided in this rule, the party prevailing in the Court of Appeal in a civil case other than a juvenile case is entitled to costs on appeal. (2) The prevailing party is the respondent if the Court of Appeal affirms the judgment without modification or dismisses the appeal. The prevailing party is the appellant if the court reverses the judgment in its entirety. (3) If the Court of Appeal reverses the judgment in part or modifies it, or if there is more than one notice

  25. Rule 8.500 - Petition for review

    Cal. R. 8.500   Cited 337 times

    (a)Right to file a petition, answer, or reply (1) A party may file a petition in the Supreme Court for review of any decision of the Court of Appeal, including any interlocutory order, except the denial of a transfer of a case within the appellate jurisdiction of the superior court. (2) A party may file an answer responding to the issues raised in the petition. In the answer, the party may ask the court to address additional issues if it grants review. (3) The petitioner may file a reply to the answer